Originally Posted by ski1
Really ? So you believe that since Applecare only had 0.55% of the customers call in on the problem, this must accurately represent the actual number of people experiencing this issue ?
Many people are aware of this issue. Many of these same people know Apple is aware of the issue. So why would the customer ....
I know you are mostly arguing with anonymouse
here, but I can't stand to read this junk anymore. The whole idea that the 0.55% of people who called AppleCare over this is some kind "managed statistic," or that it isn't representative of the true return rate is a total crock
Yes, those that call AppleCare and those that get AppleCare are generally a different kind of customer from average. They are smarter, they are more knowledgeable about Apple in general and more likely to wait before calling AppleCare. They are more likely to not be whiners (they are insured after all), they are more likely to be following the issue in the press and more likely to be waiting for the results of the press conference. Everything you think about this group that biases the response might in fact be absolutely true.
However, there is also a startlingly low (and very similar), return rate to AT&T stores.
It could easily be argued, (and I'm going to do it here), that this second group is the exact opposite
of the first. That this group of folks who bought it from AT&T (not Apple), are *not* "Apple-followers" and *don't* read the press about such things. These folks are just people who bought a phone from a store and want to return it because it doesn't seem to work for them. If we believe that the first group has bias one way, surely this group is almost certainly the exact opposite in every way.
is that both
of these differing
groups of people questioned the phone's utility and possibly even returned the phone at pretty much the same ratio
. The very low rate of return and the very low rate of dissatisfaction is the same whether the customer was following the news or not, and whether they were an Apple groupie or not.
If every study could be discounted by saying "well, yeah, but most of those folks that didn't (do "x" or whatever) were probably *thinking* of doing it." ... then no study could ever be trusted. What you are saying about the AppleCare group might sound
reasonable when you say it, but logically it's total nonsense without some kind of detailed supporting evidence to that effect.